Rules for concealed armor?

[Yogibear41]

Are there rules for concealed armor in 3.5? I know you can use sleight of hand to conceal a weapon you are carrying but what about armor? would it be a disguise check? Basically want a character to be able to wear a mithril chain shirt under normal clothes and appear as if they are only wearing normal clothes, similar to that scene in the lord of the rings where Frodo gets stabbed and everyone thinks he is dead because they don't realize he has the armor on.

Clip for reference:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LNzFqI6LfNw

[Duke of Urrel]

I think this is straightforwardly Disguise skill. You wear something that covers up the armor and act nonchalant.

Without the use of magic, such as the Disguise Self spell, the ways in which you can disguise the fact that you are armored are limited. You have to cover up the armor somehow. If the armor is very bulky, this may be challenging. But it's not hard to cover up a mithral chain shirt.

[Maat Mons]

Celestial Armor can explicitly be hidden in this fashion. If you aren’t worried about people using True Seeing, putting the Glammered ability on any suit of armor will also cover you nicely.

[ShurikVch]

Technically, unless the clothes in question is overly form-fitting, openwork, or transparent - people wouldn't have LoS to the armor, and thus - it would be completely invisible to them.
Thus, the only thing you should worry about is the possible clinking of the hidden mail...

[spectralphoenix]

I'd probably consider it a Disguise check with the +5 for 'minor details only'. Maybe even a bigger bonus, but add on your ACP, or even double your ACP, since it's a lot harder to hide a suit of full plate than leather or mithral chain. And maybe Celestial Chain can't be detected as long as it's completely under clothing due to the description.

[Biggus]

Celestial Armor can explicitly be hidden in this fashion.

This suggests that a mithral shirt should be able to do the same as it weighs considerably less (12.5lbs vs 20lbs).


Technically, unless the clothes in question is overly form-fitting, openwork, or transparent - people wouldn't have LoS to the armor, and thus - it would be completely invisible to them.
Thus, the only thing you should worry about is the possible clinking of the hidden mail...

I thought the same, under fairly thick, loose clothing it should be effectively impossible to see.

Any thoughts what the DC should be for a Listen check? Given that a mithral shirt doesn't give any penalty to Move Silently, I imagine it would be quite high?

[SangoProduction]

Unless you're in WoW, armor isn't particularly bulky. And if you really wanted to conceal it, just wear a cloak (a real cloak, not what WoW calls a cloak, which is just a cape). Cover up, and maybe pad / grease the joints, and it should be almost impossible to notice if you're not expressly inspecting for it.
So yeah, I agree with the previous post that it should be a +5 for "minor details only."

Add ACP to the disguise check as well. Just to represent that there is a bit more effort needed to make full plate discrete, as compared to chain mail or the like.

[Jervis]

Technically, unless the clothes in question is overly form-fitting, openwork, or transparent - people wouldn't have LoS to the armor, and thus - it would be completely invisible to them.
Thus, the only thing you should worry about is the possible clinking of the hidden mail...

Just use a tower shield. It gives you total cover which blocks line of sight for you and your gear, which includes the tower shield. Meaning tower shield users are always invisible

[St Fan]

Alternatively, armors with the called property don't need to be worn at all. They can just be called when needed.